posted November 19, 1999 04:07 AM            

Question: Is language symbolic of reality? And if so then what is reality?

Btw, these 2 questions are really conversation catalysts. Put them to good use.

posted November 21, 1999 04:12 PM            

There is no direct link between reality and language, language is defined by social convention.

A rose by any other name still smells as sweet. A cliche.

"But all cliches are true."

"Which is in itself a cliche."

posted November 21, 1999 07:03 PM            

What is "reality"? Can anyone/anybody/anything/anyhow define the word/term/psychological-trigger-to-release-homicidal-feelings-and-actions? I n o rder t o u nderstand languag ew emus tfirs tunderstand reality. Or at least understand what reality is. (i write strangely do to the fact I have a lolipop in my mouth at this very moment...mmm...erotic cakes...) What is reality and what is illusion? Please reply asap.

posted November 24, 1999 12:45 AM            

The

posted November 25, 1999 09:27 PM            

With language we can play lets pretend very quickly and easily draw people in.

Without it we have to live in the real world and alone and that's scary.

So with a better language we can tell more complex lies, and in faster time.

I like lies better than truth because lies are more easily demonstrated. You can't actually prove a truth, except in terms of probability. Perhaps big language lies are harder for us to disprove.

What the new language seem to be in the INVI's is a command code for human consciousness, so this is language as agent not communication. (because they are not conveying content but setting forth a behaviour that was already implicit.)

Actually its behaving like a virus (breeding rapidly to overwhelm resistence.) And I always thought 'language is a virus' was a crap record.

posted November 27, 1999 12:37 AM            

I have dug deeper into the neurolinguistic, psychonanalytical part of my brain and have arisen with a new thought. Possibly a key to this whole language:reality concept. The key is, ofcourse, the perception of concept.

?!(huh? wtf is that...thing talking about?)?!

Have you efer heard of seasonal depression disorder? It is a depression that is caused by the weather. It is a direct relationship. Bad weather = bad mood. Let us look at this as a cause and effect relationship.

Cause: Bad weather
Effect: I awake pissed and depressed.

This is what I and most (or all) people think.

Now, for the key. The perception of concept. Put in concept. Flip. Look again.

Cause: I awake pissed and depressed.
Effect: Bad weather.

The key has given us another way of looking at things. Perhaps a change of mood while sleeping causes the local weather to change. Possible?

Perhaps, language is not a lie after all for, once again, what is reality? perhaps language is a magick wand that when spoken properly with meaning, forms the things it desrcribes, or whatever.

It all depends the way one looks upon it.

-=Lionheat=-

posted November 27, 1999 12:40 PM            

It is impossible (normally) to grasp reality because we are in it, ( and the noise we make) disturbs the observation.

The living Bhuddha is referred to I believe as 'one who has come and gone'

Language is an activity which contributes to the creation of the noise that is self, and the grammar creates the subject/object divide that meditation destroys.

posted November 27, 1999 05:41 PM            

Whoo. The cold medicine is really starting to kick in now. That's it, back to Winnipeg.

posted November 27, 1999 06:44 PM            

Also, it is possible to look at TREE and see the letters individually.
Tvxvsd

Rfgdf
rfeffgefdgE
fefEgegrdg

By looking at the capital letters above you see the different aspects of TREE. To stop the aprehension of the letters you have to split up the letters themselves and look at the different parts of them.

This is starting to sound like I am discussing a view of dimensions. The word "hyperspace" rings through my mind.
I am picturing wormholes on planes.

Has language always been around? Animals have language. Maybe all things have language. Maybe language is a tool to alter reality and more. Maybe all of us here should come up with an experiment to see how language affects reality or whatever you want to call it and think what it means. The experiment should have a very straight-forward result and stuff.

What are all of your thoughts on this?

-=Lionheart=-

posted November 28, 1999 12:57 PM            

"Some silly ideas have long, stubborn lives: among the most stubborn (and silly) is the notion that 'words' are only names for THINGS'. Jonothan Swift mocked it two-and-a-half centuries ago in 'Gulliver's Travels' - the central character, on a visit to the school of languages in the kingdom of Balnibarbi, encounters the following scheme: 'Since words are only names for THINGS, it would be more convenient for all men to carry about them such THINGS as were necessary to express the particular business they are to discourse on...' But this silliness survives, much to our detriment and confusion. If the proposition were literally true, we would, of course, be unable to talk about such abractions as 'freedom' and 'justice'; the fact that we do go on talking about them, even laying down our lives in their service, suggests we know how complex the relation between words and things can be. There are certain words, however, that habitually cause trouble because their unstable, shifting connection to things gets either ignored or denied. 'Love' ranks at the top of the list, but 'pornography' comes a close second."

The writer, Walter Kendrick, then places a Balnibarbian sage on a quest to carry everything that has meant pornography, at one time or the other, over the past 1000 years. The point is this: Language began as a description of objects around us and thoughts we have (happiness, sadness, fear etc), but they have evolved into something greater. No longer do we use language to define reality.

Have you ever read a description of a four dimensional object. I have one on a hyper-sphere: "[the hypersphere] was an ordinary three-dimenional globe, out of which, on each side, beginning at its vertical circumference bent, tapering horns proceeded, which, with a circular bend, united their points above the globe from which they started." - Johan Von Manen

This can be extremely confusing to picture. Primarily because the language itself is not the object. Thus what is presented is a description, not the true self. But because popular belief is that the objects and language are one and the same, as Kendrick suggested, reality (based upon self-perception) becomes distorted.

Another example of this is the word 'nothing'. A friend of mine once tried to prove that nothing is something. In language this is quite true, as the word is a noun, and therefore something. But as a concept, oh no, it is far more. To say 'I am doing nothing' means you could quite possibly be doing something. You could be sitting down, staring at a blank wall. This, of course, is something. However, because we are using language we create a 'language paradox' (Yippee! I coined a phrase!) which confuses our reality.

THis does not mean that language is a bad thing though. It can be used to our advantage, if you know how to use it right. Refering back to my earlier example of four dimension objects, it is easy to work with them without even having to picture them, as Charles H Himton demonstrates. He refers to the fact that whenever a dimension rises in level it grows by two directions.

0-D to 1-D: East and West
1-D to 2-D: North and South
2-D to 3-D: Up and Down
3-D to 4-D: Ana and Kata

By creating a name for these directions, you are able to work with different four-dimensional bodies without ever having to picture them.

I've just realised that if i type any more, you people will faint from exhaustion (well, at least some of you), so i guess thats all from me for now

Imp0zz!bL

posted November 30, 1999 03:16 AM            

Second of all, those things..uh.. words at the end of my messages are just a quote from some song you probably never heard from a band that I came upon by quite an accident, and a cheap accident it was.

Third of all, I have recently come upon a loose theory in my head handed over to me by my subconcious. It's pretty cool, interesting, and a bit chocolaty. It says that one can achieve magickal actions by the use of need.

What do you want to happen?

I want the president's head to explode while he's having wild sex with his dog.

This will probably not happen even though you want it to.
Let's say that you learn how to feel the need for something that you want. No, not like a need for food or stuff. A real need if you have ever felt it. Like the need for peace. So here goes...

You NEED the president's head to explode while he's having wild sex with his dog.

<pant pant pant> POP!

Let me explain this better.

An animals basic drives are lovin' and eatin'. Why? Because the animal sub-conciously WANTS to survive. That is a want disguised as a need. A need is powerful. A powerful ,agicion/sorcerer/shamn/vodoo/whatever people call themselves nowdays can bring about a need at will.

Example:
The magician, let's call him A.C., wants 666 monetary units. So, A.C. translates, using his will, the want into a NEED. The NEED is of great power (btw, power is an illusion. more on that later) and therefore changes the materialistic illusion, which we call reality, into making 666 monetary units appear in his some-what closed fist.

PUFF!

Language.

Talk to yourself OUTLOUD (you nutcase!) and see how it affects you. Does the effect of saying something out loud differ from saying some nameless thing inside the wards of one's own head? It helps you BELIEVE (right on, brother! now go and F.U.C.K. that cow!) in whatever you are saying.

Try this theory out. Try to form a need for all of humanity to be enlightened. Best of peace, love, life, drugs, etc., etc., etc...

-=Lionheart=-

posted December 10, 1999 03:47 AM            

Who the hell is sending these thoughts to my head?

-=Lionheart=-